Baldur's gate 3 idea
Bastion72
Member Posts: 60
I just tought about an idea for Baldur's gate 3. The dark lord Bane returns and wants to exterminate all other gods and godchilds so he can create a new dark era where all races worship and serve him. The main protagonist(you) is now the new lord of murder and hears rumors about Bane's return and starts forging alliances and prepares for a great war. He walks the land like a normal adventurer with his son (Viconia or Aerie's child),asks his old friends for help (for exaple:Minsc,Valygar,etc..). He also wages a war against the spider queen Lolth (that b*tch that poisons Viconia >:( ) so that he can avenge Viconia. Some other heroes from other Dungeons and dragons games appear to help him. During the great war he must kill all of Bane's servents so that he can weaken him ( For example: Tiamat-the 5 headed dragon). During his new adventure he must face many hard decisions to win this war.
So,what do you think of that? You have any other ideas?
So,what do you think of that? You have any other ideas?
2
Comments
I'm particularly interested in character creation but any insight would be welcome.
But, about BG3, I'am leaving it completly up to the devs, they are the ones who were brave and passionate to work on BG again.
BG3 It's a new game and (whatever they decide, 2d,3d,...5d), as long as it's dnd I trust devs to choose the ruleset they find most adequate/fun.
But (even if they are forced to use X rules) at least BG3 will be a new game, most probably a little distant from the first two so it may give devs more space for criativity, and they seem to know what they are doing
The documents are early drafts. So anything might be subject to changes.
The game has a nice old-school-feeling when you use the basic rules. But since it's planned to be modular you can also play it like a 3E or 4E game.
The basic rules are kind of 2.5E, thus they would fit very well for a BG3 game, if you ask me. Since those basic rules are quick and easy to play, I guess that they can't be implement well in a computer game as well.
If you have any specific questions fee free to ask.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/showwiki.php?title=Books:D+and+D+Next
(I'm assuming linking to a D&D article on a D&D fansite from the site of a D&D videogame is not very illegal)
@Brix
Lucky you. I'm very curious as to how it played. I've played a ton of 3.5, a little 4th and a liiiittle 2nd so I wonder how the whole thing is going to play out. It seems like Wizards is taking this whole "we're actually going to listen to fans and take feedback to make it a game for everyone to enjoy" thing quite seriously this time, which is a good thing!
So the other choice could be 2E. 2E is quick and easy to play, but contains some goofy rules from a modern point of view.
The best system for me would be a kind of 3E/2E hybrid. And it looks like wizards in heading into this direction. But of course we have to wait. Of course a playtest might bring forward a game that most people comply with, but no neccessarily the best game. As with have seen with PRPG which contained some nice rules in alpha and beta playtest.
I'm a naysayer at the first opportunity, but the 5E playtest, makes me happy so far.
Ok, that looks promising...
I've always meant to ask something to a suitable DnD player and it seems you're it. Is it true that there's a big leap between how much a PC can do between 2E and 3E? As in, characters tend to be more mundane in 2E? This is something I heard once and I wondered if said change of direction would affect a computer game too much, as I have yet to play a DnD CRPG that isn't based on 2E.
Furthermore... how's 5E's spell system?
I can't answer you about PnP, but Icewind Dale 2 used 3E rules.
Some features:
-Most rolls based off of d20 roll (either opposed to an advesary's roll or against a "DC" or a difficulty class (I think). You can think of DC as something like Armor class (though the number scales up rather than down like 2e to where you need to get a result equal to or above the ac/dc). So, if you had to pick a lock with a DC of 20 you'd need to get a 20 or higher (though includes skill and attribute bonuses)
-Combat. Rules for disarm, bull rush, sundering (smashing opponents equipment), tripping etc.
-Skills for everybody. Every class has an allotment of skillpoints that they can assign to different skills. You know how the thief and a few others could hide in shadows, pick locks, etc? Well, everybody can try to do those sorts of things though generally the thief (renamed rogue) has more skills and is better at her specialties (for ex is the only class that can detect magic traps I believe). Also, there are a lot more skills including social skills like intimidate and sense motive. (basically what they sound like)
-Feats: each class gets a number of special abilities called 'feats' that either make them better at the things they could normally do (like + to hit and/or damage with a sword) or do new things. A spellcaster can get 'metamagic' and 'creation' feats that allow them to cast stronger spells (though in a higher level slot) and create magic equipment. Fighters get more (combat-like) feats than anybody.
There is a lot more but that's a general idea
I agree with @Brix about pathfinder (though I really liked Tome of Battle warblades (more than pf fighters) swordsages (rather than monk) and crusaders (rather than pally's) though with the last nerfed a little bit and 3.5 psionics. Otherwise I'd say that pathfinder is the best iteration.
Rather than explain it here's the pathfinder srd: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/home
I can probably find the 3.5 srd (or you can google it) but it won't be as cool (though I think you can find psionics rules but no ToB.
NWN uses 3E and that's the implementation I'm most familiar with although it's been a few years since I've played that series and I haven't played IWD2 yet. I'm not sure what you mean characters didn't seem to become more powerful in 3E then. They did and are more individualized too with the available feats and more multiclassing options.
Bard/Assassin or a Wizard with Combat Casting feat (can't be interuppted even if hit) are cool options. Red Dragon Disciple gains ungodly stat bonuses. Dwarven Defenders get great damage reduction.
Assassin is a prestige class meaning you can't pick it at the start of the game but you can pick it later once you qualify for it (evil alignment and some ranks in some skills). That means an Evil Ranger could pick the correct skills and later on become a Ranger/Assassin with no base thief class or a plain thief could become a thief/assassin later with the same skill points.
The options you get for character development in 3E seem siginificantly more numerous than 2E (again mostly comparing BG series with NWN implementations).
2E = DOS: stable, but you can't do many things
3E = Windows: you can do many things, but the longer it runs, the buggier it gets
In 3E you can even create x-men with the normal rules thanks to feats and some prestige classes. 2E is, as you said, more mundane (but contains some goofy rules)
My opinion: take the best of both worlds and you have the perfect D&D game.
The magic system in 5E is vancian (plus some at-will-powers), although spellpoints might be an option in later modules.
@Aliteri
Get Temple of Elemental Evil and play it for 2-3 hours. You'll know all you need to know about 3.5 D&D. It's the most faithful D&D adaptation in a game ever. It's got the stats, spells, skills (most of them anyway), feats and all the combat options (flanking, disarming, coup-de-gracing, feints, etc). Neverwinter Nights bastardised the system, even more than Icewind Dale 2 did, so try not to take those as an example.
Because of the way 3.5 is built, with a lot of customisation in mind, it's possible to powergame the hell out of a character and make it vastly overpowered due to clever min-maxing. I don't think this was possible in 2nd Ed. However, in my experience, for the average player it does simply offer more ways to make your character yours.
Pathfinder argueably does this even better, though their drive to make everything fancier is slowly making it a slow bog of a system. Also, it gives almost every class a list of extra powers and abilities but by the higher levels you get so many, you don't remember half of them. That's always a shame. I like it though, very versatile.
And then there seems to be the 'edition free' goodies which look really good. No/less magic item dependence at higher levels, scaled down skill bonuses and rather incorporating some sort of 'mastery' system (like--forget their name--skill powers of 3.5 maybe?) and scaling damage rather than bonuses to hit, making it possible for a crowd of low level creatures to take down a much higher level creature.
I also get that they are trying to make it possible to 'play a 2ed-style character alongside a 3 or 4 ed style character.' I can see that with the (possible) treatment of the fighter. On the one hand, it seems you can create a guy that just hits things hard, or one that hits/damages less but might stun or do some battlefield control...
Is this right? Missed this earlier. Thank you! I'm interested in this 'background' and 'themes'. Reminds me of archetypes though a little more modular. What do they look like so far?
See, each spell is a special ability but we manage.
If I smoosh all the enemies easily with ability A then gaining abilities B,C,D,E,F that also smoosh the enemies don't appeal to me. Also item X,Y,Z that grant immunity to fire but not acid and acid but not fire and smoosh enemies are just not needed. Especially don't enjoy going to a sub menu to activate the smooshing ability.
On a not very related note, I've always liked passive ability upgrades rather than button mashing abilities that need you to do lots of things to activate as well.
I'm not sure if that explains well anything.
I think 5e (or whatever they're going to call it) might satisfy us both. You can have your invisibles and I can have my specials. Here's hoping!
Themes and backgrounds are optional (in the playtest). They give the classes more deptht.
Backgrounds are things you are good at (what you did earlier)
Themes are kind of roles or kits as you like, that tell you how you do what you do.
Playtesters are encouraged to tinker with these things, eg. create mage knight (in contrast to a fighter knight)
This is still a bit blurry to me, but seem to allow great flexibility